About your Search

20121006
20121014
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)
for your talk today. thank you so much, larry. [applause] >> two presidential debates coming up. >> defense secretary says the u.s. space has the possibility of a close cyber pearl harbor that could shut down the transportation system, military networks, and military systems. secretary panetta's remarks came yesterday in new york city. >> frank, five words. you deserve to be here. [applause] ladies and gentlemen, it is now and high honor to introduce the most talented, versatile, and experienced leaders in american government, a man who serves our country by meeting the extraordinary challenges of our times. i am sure secretary of defense, leon panetta thinks on his days in the u.s. army intelligence where he received the army accommodation metal. he chaired the house budget committee before moving on to be the director was office management budget. from there, president clinton tapped him to be white house chief of staff. as directer of central intelligence, leon pa panetta me many critical decisions, but more recently, one particularly outstanding, and a public contribution to the defense
military in tunisia as a major issue. in libya there was no ministry of defense under gadhafi, and we don't even have a minister of defense in the newly-reformed, so curbing military power in the narrow sense of an army isn't the main issue in tunisia either, and i actually think -- excuse me, libya -- and i actually think that probably, you know, 95% of the 250,000 or so libyans walking around with weapons are trying to keep the peace, not make mischief. .. and the security forces and in defense of the regime that is where the action is, not in the military. you're the geopolitics guy. >> i thought the worst-case scenario for the algerian military is instability in northern mali. and you know what is going on in the eastern front with libya. i know that some troops had to be redeployed in the eastern front because of the, the traffic of armaments and drugs and other issues. this is the worst case so. >> i just want to take the opportunity to answer a question that hasn't been asked. but, this is something that i was thinking about. it's slightly related to your question but it's somethin
to tell them we just change your missile defense plan. he doesn't plan to go whisper to the president of france that mr. netanyahu was a pain, you know where. he doesn't plan to turn around to the russian president and say, just wait, once i have flex but i can do all kinds of things i can't do right now. he doesn't plan to stand aside when there's a major green revolution in iran, and the united states does nothing. we're supposedly trying to get the mullahs to appeal to what we're looking for, and at the same time, the very same mullahs know that when there was a real threat to them, we sat on our hands. what does that tell you about our credibility? what does that tell you about us? >> dov them you've written a book about afghanistan. you were the point person on the afghan account, during the george w. bush administration. governor romney mentioned of course the 2014 drawdown in his monday speech. what he didn't talk about is that it was a strategic partnership agreement that the administration had negotiate with the afghan government, which will keep american soldiers in afghanis
is being addressed. as a matter of fact, we are using the department of defense and a coordinated effort, but i don't believe that we are going to turn the department of defense and to a police organization. we are using our military assets and a prudent way to deal with the introduction, and we have made some success in this area. 70 tons of cocaine have been stopped. but you know when you look at the drug problem, and it is a tremendous problem and there are no so easy solutions to it. it is a complicated problem and it's heading up the effort to try to create a drug free america not only will we utilize national defence and the department of defense we've got to get to education and education ought to begin at home and not to be reinforced in our schools. there is another thing they're will be more important than the premise of this question on a hypothetical of using troops. we will use the military assets. we are not going to -- we will use military assets, but we need to focus on another part of this problem, and that problem as law enforcement. and here is where we have a major di
of defense and the national security council. prior to becoming chairman, he served briefly as the army's 37th chief of staff. general dempsey is a bit of an unexpected appointment. he had just been sworn in as the army chief of staff a couple of months prior, but when the nomination process for another candidate stalled, general dempsey was called to serve a grateful nation, and he has done so with distinction. since taking the chairman's job a year ago, the 37-year army veteran has made headlines by dealing with the infamous quran-burning pastor by calling him up and asking him to withdraw his support for the anti-muslim video that sparked protests across the middle east. he expressed disappointment over the navy seal who published an unauthorized account of the killing of osama bin laden. he said an israeli attack on iran would clearly delay but probably not destroy iran's nuclear program. he has stressed the need to retool the military for a postwar world with smaller pentagon budgets, and most recently he has spoken about the need to turn up the volume on ways to help war veterans reint
help. the cia, the nsa, the department of defense, they know it's at the border sometimes come and we don't. so, the businesses have to work together in this to protect the american public so that we can stop cybercrime. but it's a big deal and it is going to get worse. computers and ten years would be faster and the calculations would get through quicker to meet that in every way, shape and form. the banks are pretty good at this. they wouldn't do this along time and all of the rules and regulations, but how many of you worry about that? it's the ciders to becoming over the internet. everything we do we know more about some of that stuff and you think but think of the person that knows your company from inside. that's what we are going to get. so. >> thank you for that reassuring point. there is a young lady in the second to the last row. >> how do you protect yourself from any one individual getting access. >> daniel douglas from the washington post. many of the rules under dodd-frank have to be written, so i'm wondering how much of an impact is the current regulatory environment ha
collectively has legitimacy beyond its specific military defense security functions. to what extent does the army retain political legitimacy to be a political actor. now, over the last eight years, the regular army has been off center stage. it's been in the wings. by getting rid of the previous chief of staff who overplayed his hand, he has persuaded the regular army to stay out of the political limelight. and that's simple by the problems facing him but it meant that he wasn't the only game. the other was the head of the political intelligence. so the dr, departments of -- [inaudible] which covers the whole of intelligence services, has become more powerful over the last eight years than it was previously. and there's been this polarization if you like within the regime between the presidency and the drs, the two crucial power centers in the executive of the state. what that means is that one thing that we have to ask ourselves is to what extent the algerian army can make a political comeback. in the event that there is a succession problem in the drs. i think a second aspect of this
enemies in the middle east when our words are not backed up by deeds. when our defense spending is arbitrarily and deeply qaeda. while i have a trade agenda to speak of and it is not one of partnership, but opacity. >> it garnered a headline in "usa today." romney's hope is not a strategy. susan glasser, how much of his speech was against president obama and what he stunned? and how much of slain at his own trajectory and agenda? >> mostly most was the challenger, this is a critique of the obama policy and that is a very common tax by challengers. there were some good lines. he talked hope is not a strategy. he's tried to emphasize his critique of obama as fighting from behind, which was sort of an unnamed administration official at the very end of a new yorker magazine piece last year and has become a sort of state of republican critiques of the president's foreign policy. that being said, there are some real differences between obama and romney when it comes to foreign policy. for example, romney has russia as an important geopolitical united states. much of the surprise of hi
-fly zone over syria sending arms of supplies to anti-government groups and bombing the air defense or sending troops into syria. so, we asked them about each one. let me give you a summary with a very quick comment. you can see that 60% support increasing diplomatic sanctions on syria. but what is interesting is 59% support a no-fly zone over syria as well. this is interesting because we can have a conversation about what that means, will the public thinks because you can see from the three categories below that there is only 22% support arming the syrian rebels. and i should say on that one there was a poll that was done also in june asking the same questions. by large, the results of the poll were pretty much the same with an exception that in between there was also a cnn poll conducted in august which showed a more divided american public on the issue of arming the rebels. and so, that could be changed from august. you can see that only 22% support arming the rebels, 21% support bombing the air defense sending the troops into syria? there seems to the contradiction of sorts in t
a blog, i think you had a blog in "the new yorker" about the defense of marriage act and the way it would be reviewed and i thought that would be an interesting thing to bring at there are two issues to the supreme court of the same time and they both relate to same-sex marriage but the cases is a challenge to the constitutionality of the defense of marriage act. as i'm sure many of you know the defense of marriage act passed in 1996 says the federal government will not recognize same-sex marriages under any circumstances even if they are legal in the of where and just as married as any heterosexual couple in massachusetts. as i'm sure you know under the internal revenue code, money one spouse to the other but because the irs can't surviving spouse had to pay taxes on that money. there was a considerable amount so it was a very straight up challenge to that law. the other case that is heading to the supreme court is the proposition 8 case out of california and equal protection it loving versus virginia and the sense that can the state to ban this? the doma case, the case is a lot easier l
in philadelphia and the other points in the ratification process. who writes like the sort of defenses and arguments that you see in the federalist today. who sits at home and giraffes the arguments that you see and letters? you have a staff drafting this. these are people that were engaged and they also want you to know these were not scholars, these were not people that had appropriated to themselves license to interpret where dhaka this great document. these were foreigners and business people, some of them who had formal education and some who did not, that they cared about this country. again when i go back to your book you talk about the written and the unwritten constitution. the unwritten constitution is really what we did. sort of trying to apply at in the evens and problems and cases and that debate continues on each one of those and that's why you see the different points. that's why your scholarship is so important, and one thing i like about the tone of your book is it is so positive it's refreshing. it's not all i have all the answers but do have some answers. let's talk
, will make you and your family full text defense. but what they do? they go there, buy these houses, fix them up from a sense the to school. they make a big fuss and demand the schools get better. immigrants have a very low crime rate so you certainly don't have to worry about that. they create businesses. they had to drive back and drive back at night they do it. it's still, no matter how many 's the one current needs.a.ople it costs us nothing but his phenomenally valuable overseas. and you'd get people people to come here and they would sell those cities with the vibrancy and the people who are unemployed in the cities would all of a sudden have companies that can go to work with. they get jobs helping fix up houses. they been the schools, driving the buses, starting businesses of their own because they see how other people do it. other than that, it's immigrants that create the jobs the river was talking about the really are in need. >> i think that's a pretty art price to pay. cities, and cities go and there's great new cities being built, been added in other cities decline. actually if
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)